Home > Rep Maurice Hinchey: This Congress has ’failed completely’ to oversee the (…)

Rep Maurice Hinchey: This Congress has ’failed completely’ to oversee the White House

by Open-Publishing - Wednesday 27 July 2005
3 comments

Wars and conflicts International Attack-Terrorism Governments USA

This country in my opinion is facing one of the most critical
moments in our history. The idea that a President of the United
States may have misled the Congress and the American people with
regard to war is the most flagrant example of bad leadership and
irresponsibility and corruption that one could imagine in a
democratic republic such as ours. So what is being done today I
think is incredibly important and I am deeply indebted to you, Mr.
Conyers, for allowing it to happen or making it happen.

The fact that we’re in a tiny little room like this discussing one
of the most important issues before the American public indicates
how irresponsible this Congress is. Under the Constitution, the
Congress of the United States has the responsibility to oversee the
Executive Branch and to make certain that the Executive Branch’s
actions and activities are wholly and completely consistent with
the law as written by the Congress. This Congress has abrogated its
responsibility, failed
completely
in its obligations and responsibilities to
oversee this administration.

It’s unfortunate, but in Washington today we have a monolithic
government. We do not have
the checks and balances which are so critically important to
allowing this country to keep functioning properly. Many of us
realize that the time that that resolution was passed in October,
that the basis for the resolution as it was presented by the White
House and the leadership here in the Congress was largely if not
completely false.

Downing Street
Memo Audio

(mp3s: rt-click -> save as)
1. McGovern - We now Know
2. Why? O.I.L.
3. Rep. Hinchey - Critical
4. Bonifaz: The Source
5. House Cleaning
6. Should we stay or go?
7. Congressional Coverup
8. It’s Over for G.W. Bush

We did not have all the information then, but on the basis of the
information that we had which was available to every member of the
Congress and to a large number of the American population, it was
clear that there was no connection between Iraq and the attack of
September 11th, that there was no relationship of any consequence
between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden as it was presented by
administration.

And it was clear that whatever weapons of mass destruction,
chemical and biological weapons, including all of those which were
placed in Iraq during the mid- to late-1980s and early-1990s by
this government under the administration of Ronald Reagan and the
administration of George H. W. Bush, all of those chemical and
biological weapons as well as conventional weapons which were sent
there during that time were largely accounted for if not completely
accounted for.

Now the Downing Street Memo which says clearly that the
administration twisted the intelligence and the facts around the
policy documents again what we believed to be the case in October
2002 and all of the period of time sometime before that and all of
the period of time after that.

So if this administration did what now seems apparent and in fact
twisted and distorted the facts in order to accomplish a policy
which was set in place long before the attack of September 11th and
sought to exploit the attack of September 11th in order to carry
out that policy, i.e., the attack on Iraq. And then alleged that
any mistakes that may have been made were the result of
malfunctions in the intelligence system, putting the blame of the
responsibility for all of that activity in the Central Intelligence
Agency, on the FBI, on the other aspects of American intelligence,
and that is not the case which it seems to be. What is the impact
of that on the American intelligence system?

The President is saying to us that the attack on Iraq among other
things has made America and the world more secure. It seems to me
it has made it much less secure. It seems to me as a nation we are
much less secure today than we were before this policy was put into
effect.

This is a Partial Transcript form Conyers Downing Street Minutes Hearing June
16

Rep.
Maurice Hinchey (MP3 #3 Critical)

Forum posts

  • There’s more than just this....as if this isn’t enough.
    Jeb Bush...Shocking ’Coin Gate’ Crimes and Murder Published on 02 July 2005 Source: TNC Staff Reporter FL

    Florida Investigator Who Got Too Close to Florida "Coin Gate" Silenced by Jeb Bush’s Gangsters

    http://prissypatriot.blogspot.com

    Bottom right link "Coingate" on blog

    This info comes from a professional Criminal Justice pratictioners mag

  • "...It seems to me as a nation we are much less secure today than we were before this policy was put into effect."...

    Now I don’t expect Mo Hinchey to actually back up what he says, as for the time I have followed him, I have seen nothing but loony unsubstantiated rants from someone who certainly appears to be.. well, unstable, eccentric, and mad at the world, but especially mad at Karl Rove.

    But in this case, I really want to know what information does he base his statement that we are much less secure as a nation than we were before we actually started going after the terrorists and the regimes that supported them instead of sitting around nervously waiting for the next attack.

    Maurice Hinchey is a not-so-smart fella with truly sophomoric analytical reasoning skills. Only a choir of like-minded fools can sit through one of his aimless ranting sermons.

    • Going after Iraq would have improved the security if Iraq had anything to do with supporting terrorists. But there’s no proof that this is the case. On the contrary, the fact that we wasted so many resources on something that was not a threat has INCREASED the treat from the real terroists, because they have had so much time to regroup after afghanistan.